<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is The Original 1857 Scotus  Ruling Of Dred Scott V. Sanford The Real Motive Behind Those Who R Claiming That ?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sanfordapartments.com/sanford-questions/is-the-original-1857-scotus-ruling-of-dred-scott-v-sanford-the-real-motive-behind-those-who-r-claiming-that/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sanfordapartments.com/sanford-questions/is-the-original-1857-scotus-ruling-of-dred-scott-v-sanford-the-real-motive-behind-those-who-r-claiming-that/</link>
	<description>Sanford Apartment Information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 20:40:27 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: A concerned AMERICAN</title>
		<link>http://sanfordapartments.com/sanford-questions/is-the-original-1857-scotus-ruling-of-dred-scott-v-sanford-the-real-motive-behind-those-who-r-claiming-that/comment-page-1/#comment-5092</link>
		<dc:creator>A concerned AMERICAN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:45:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sanfordapartments.squeezeapenny.com/sanford-questions/is-the-original-1857-scotus-ruling-of-dred-scott-v-sanford-the-real-motive-behind-those-who-r-claiming-that/#comment-5092</guid>
		<description>No.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Osama Obama Yomama</title>
		<link>http://sanfordapartments.com/sanford-questions/is-the-original-1857-scotus-ruling-of-dred-scott-v-sanford-the-real-motive-behind-those-who-r-claiming-that/comment-page-1/#comment-5091</link>
		<dc:creator>Osama Obama Yomama</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 11:59:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sanfordapartments.squeezeapenny.com/sanford-questions/is-the-original-1857-scotus-ruling-of-dred-scott-v-sanford-the-real-motive-behind-those-who-r-claiming-that/#comment-5091</guid>
		<description>uh, uh, uh, no</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>uh, uh, uh, no</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul M</title>
		<link>http://sanfordapartments.com/sanford-questions/is-the-original-1857-scotus-ruling-of-dred-scott-v-sanford-the-real-motive-behind-those-who-r-claiming-that/comment-page-1/#comment-5090</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul M</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 07:19:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sanfordapartments.squeezeapenny.com/sanford-questions/is-the-original-1857-scotus-ruling-of-dred-scott-v-sanford-the-real-motive-behind-those-who-r-claiming-that/#comment-5090</guid>
		<description>Sometimes the best progress is made by knowing when to stop.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sometimes the best progress is made by knowing when to stop.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chuck_ju</title>
		<link>http://sanfordapartments.com/sanford-questions/is-the-original-1857-scotus-ruling-of-dred-scott-v-sanford-the-real-motive-behind-those-who-r-claiming-that/comment-page-1/#comment-5089</link>
		<dc:creator>chuck_ju</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:14:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sanfordapartments.squeezeapenny.com/sanford-questions/is-the-original-1857-scotus-ruling-of-dred-scott-v-sanford-the-real-motive-behind-those-who-r-claiming-that/#comment-5089</guid>
		<description>No. I think some people were just grasping.
 I didn&#039;t vote for your guy, but I believe in the process.
You have a great sense of history unlike some.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No. I think some people were just grasping.<br />
 I didn&#8217;t vote for your guy, but I believe in the process.<br />
You have a great sense of history unlike some.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: K-win</title>
		<link>http://sanfordapartments.com/sanford-questions/is-the-original-1857-scotus-ruling-of-dred-scott-v-sanford-the-real-motive-behind-those-who-r-claiming-that/comment-page-1/#comment-5088</link>
		<dc:creator>K-win</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 21:30:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sanfordapartments.squeezeapenny.com/sanford-questions/is-the-original-1857-scotus-ruling-of-dred-scott-v-sanford-the-real-motive-behind-those-who-r-claiming-that/#comment-5088</guid>
		<description>I think some racists scared of having a black president attempting to do everything in order to stop him from becoming the President</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think some racists scared of having a black president attempting to do everything in order to stop him from becoming the President</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TRM</title>
		<link>http://sanfordapartments.com/sanford-questions/is-the-original-1857-scotus-ruling-of-dred-scott-v-sanford-the-real-motive-behind-those-who-r-claiming-that/comment-page-1/#comment-5087</link>
		<dc:creator>TRM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 19:40:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sanfordapartments.squeezeapenny.com/sanford-questions/is-the-original-1857-scotus-ruling-of-dred-scott-v-sanford-the-real-motive-behind-those-who-r-claiming-that/#comment-5087</guid>
		<description>This is deeply ironic. Let me get this straight. You seem to be claiming (correct me if I&#039;m wrong) that it is the people on the right who are race baiting. You argue that they are the ones who are motivated by race and are trying to dig up an overturned case to prove their point.
Yet by asking this very question, indeed by acknowledging the issue of race in such a manner, you are race baiting yourself. You are the one trying to stir up the very trouble you rail against.
Let&#039;s be honest. I agree with you that the birth certificate controversy is a load of bull. But why even give these people the satisfaction of acknowledging them? Your complaints are misguided and based on purely nothing.
(And wikipedia is not a reliable source)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is deeply ironic. Let me get this straight. You seem to be claiming (correct me if I&#8217;m wrong) that it is the people on the right who are race baiting. You argue that they are the ones who are motivated by race and are trying to dig up an overturned case to prove their point.<br />
Yet by asking this very question, indeed by acknowledging the issue of race in such a manner, you are race baiting yourself. You are the one trying to stir up the very trouble you rail against.<br />
Let&#8217;s be honest. I agree with you that the birth certificate controversy is a load of bull. But why even give these people the satisfaction of acknowledging them? Your complaints are misguided and based on purely nothing.<br />
(And wikipedia is not a reliable source)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: drewdun</title>
		<link>http://sanfordapartments.com/sanford-questions/is-the-original-1857-scotus-ruling-of-dred-scott-v-sanford-the-real-motive-behind-those-who-r-claiming-that/comment-page-1/#comment-5086</link>
		<dc:creator>drewdun</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 16:08:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sanfordapartments.squeezeapenny.com/sanford-questions/is-the-original-1857-scotus-ruling-of-dred-scott-v-sanford-the-real-motive-behind-those-who-r-claiming-that/#comment-5086</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think that there is any attempt to appeal to the SCOTUS ruling. Some people are just contesting that Obama was native born. They seem to be on the lunatic fringe and the current SCOTUS is not supportive of them. I think it is simply focused on the native-born requirement of the constitution, and not on Dred Scot</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think that there is any attempt to appeal to the SCOTUS ruling. Some people are just contesting that Obama was native born. They seem to be on the lunatic fringe and the current SCOTUS is not supportive of them. I think it is simply focused on the native-born requirement of the constitution, and not on Dred Scot</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
